I was naming franchises owned by Nintendo, not just games actually developed by Nintendo. I also included Super Smash Bros. (Hal Labatories) and Pokemon (Game Freak).Heart of Darkness said:
What's with the shield against criticism Nintendo gets?
- Thread starter AzrealMaximillion
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Ummm...because they have been making and will keep making great games?? Nintendo has been in this 20+ years and will likely be here for a good 20+ more. Not many other companies have had a good a record as they have had and I doubt they are going to stop now because a bunch of teenagers and the like are getting mad on forums because Nintendo is basically wiping the floor in this generation's "console war", and Nintendo knows it too...
I don't think Golden Sun is owned by Nintendo--Nintendo just has exclusive publishing rights to Camelot's work. HAL Laboratories and Game Freak are first-party developers, if the information in this list [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo#First-party_studios] is accurate.starwarsgeek said:
Not sure about Game Freak, but there seems to be some conflicting information about Hal Labs. Its article says that it is an independent studio that makes games exclusively for Nintendo. Game Freak just says that it develops for Nintendo exclusively, so it could really go either way (although its article doesn't mention the studio being owned by Nintendo).Heart of Darkness said:
Golden Sun is listed under Nintendo's franchises on tvtropes. Also, one of its characters is an assist trophy in Super Smash Bros. Brawl, which seems to imply that it is a Nintendo-owned franchise (or part of an expanded universe for Sonic the Hedgehog or Metal Gear...)
Edit:
Upon googling for an answer to the conficting information, I found another wiki list that has Hal Labs as first party, but Game Freak as 2nd.
Anyone know if Nintendo's official website has a page that could clear this up? I'm confused and want to find out which wiki articles were correct...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nintendo_developers#Nintendo_1st_Party_Developers_.28Worldwide.29
Edit2:
This one is a list of their franchises. Golden Sun is included:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Nintendo_franchises
This and the fact that they made so many iconic games. And they have Shigeru Miyamoto, who is awesome.teh_Canape said:
Ah, then. I guess that settles that, then, assuming the info in that list is correct.starwarsgeek said:
1. Legacy pass.
2. Leading innovator of handheld and console gaming evolution.
3. Trend starter instead of follower.
4. Hasn't abandoned that idea that normal people want to play games casually and that there is more to gaming than competitive play while also not forsaking people who play competitively.
5. Still produces games that are really really good.
I cannot even believe that we still have to go over this and defend Nintendo, even though they are still pushing out primo stuff consistently for almost 30 years now. It's on the same level of absurdity as defending the legacy of The Beatles.
Super Mario Galaxy 2 was never meant to carry on the plot from the original, but instead it's a "just for funnsies" game that plays around with the ideas of the original SMG, but with more worlds and a variety of creative challenges. It was in production RIGHT AFTER they finished the original galaxy.
2. Leading innovator of handheld and console gaming evolution.
3. Trend starter instead of follower.
4. Hasn't abandoned that idea that normal people want to play games casually and that there is more to gaming than competitive play while also not forsaking people who play competitively.
5. Still produces games that are really really good.
I cannot even believe that we still have to go over this and defend Nintendo, even though they are still pushing out primo stuff consistently for almost 30 years now. It's on the same level of absurdity as defending the legacy of The Beatles.
Super Mario Galaxy 2 was never meant to carry on the plot from the original, but instead it's a "just for funnsies" game that plays around with the ideas of the original SMG, but with more worlds and a variety of creative challenges. It was in production RIGHT AFTER they finished the original galaxy.
See you'd have a point if you actually read my entire first post, which you apparently didn't.Durxom said:Ummm...because they have been making and will keep making great games?? Nintendo has been in this 20+ years and will likely be here for a good 20+ more. Not many other companies have had a good a record as they have had and I doubt they are going to stop now because a bunch of teenagers and the like are getting mad on forums because Nintendo is basically wiping the floor in this generation's "console war", and Nintendo knows it too...
Like I said, although I'm only nearing 20 years of age, I own every Nintendo console from NES except the Virtual Boy and the DS. Sold my Wii due to there not being a decent amount of support of good games when I owned it. I own more consoles than most gamers from the 80s. That's what I get for living in a town where I can walk into a store and grab one of 10 copies of FF7 black label and unopened for $40. And I'm not mad because
I'm talking about quality and innovation. Not sales. If you want to talk sales, yes the Wii this gen is the best selling. That's the first time that's happened for Nintendo in 18 years so really it being the best selling this gen is not that impressive. In fact having the most consoles sold this gen really does nothing for 3rd party games sales on the Wii.
Look at the sales for most 3rd party games. They're damn near non-existant. And some publishers have outwardly said that they will not release as many games for the Wii due to low sales.
I can't blame them. When No More Heroes & Zack and Wiki gets outsold by Wii Music by 1 million+ it kind of discourages developers to release games that aren't based for the Wii's marketing scheme.
The marketing set up Nintendo has for it's console makes it harder for developers to justify making games for the Wii these days. It's to the point where a GTA game has a been a commercial failure on a Nintendo platform. (GTA Chinatown Wars, DS)
All that aside, I'm just sick of knowing that when I pop in the new LoZ I know that it's going to be "collect 3 key items -> get Master Sword -> collect 6 medallions from sages -> go to Hyrule Castle -> kill Ganondorf" Why would I spend money on a game where I know what's going to happen? Yeah, it'll be a damn good game but at least a change of formula.
And the whole, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." arguement I've been hearing is really just an excuse to let Nintendo keep doing the same old song and dance.
People give shit to Halo and COD for being the same all the time and yet Nintendo games get this pass to keep on slugging out games that very well could have been done on the N64.
I used to love Nintendo. The SNES was my first gaming experience at the age of 5. The first game I ever beat was Ocarina of Time at the age of 10. I'm growing up. I expected Nintendo to do the same.
This is the mind set of this a majority of this generation of gaming. I myself look at the weakpoints of all games and how they can approve upon design. Some examples are weak, boring AI, Glitches, Control issues, Etc. Which in fact pisses off fanboys and those with nostalgia goggles on.Legion said:
for the starting post:
1. There is a LOT of radically different content in Mario Galaxy 2 than from Galaxy 1. Fact of the matter is that Nintendo does not repeat levels. There is not a SINGLE stage from SMG2 that is a copy-paste from 1. It is pretty much a whole new game with a variety of incredible stages. Maybe Darksiders wouldn't have been so derided had it actually done SOMETHING with all the things it borrowed such as making some creative level design.
2. Wait, did you SERIOUSLY just claim that DKC: R and KEY being 2D sidescrollers sold at retail is a NEGATIVE???? That's as hilarious to me as Yahtzee's claims of NSMBWii being uncreative, obviously not doing his job properly by commenting on level design. No, there is a place for 2D at retail and Nintendo's offerings can justify their price.
Nintendo isn't IMMUNE to criticism per say, but I just think it's funny how a bunch of criticisms from the "hardcore" are shallow, flimsy, and prove just how untrue their boasts of being "hardcore" are.
1. There is a LOT of radically different content in Mario Galaxy 2 than from Galaxy 1. Fact of the matter is that Nintendo does not repeat levels. There is not a SINGLE stage from SMG2 that is a copy-paste from 1. It is pretty much a whole new game with a variety of incredible stages. Maybe Darksiders wouldn't have been so derided had it actually done SOMETHING with all the things it borrowed such as making some creative level design.
2. Wait, did you SERIOUSLY just claim that DKC: R and KEY being 2D sidescrollers sold at retail is a NEGATIVE???? That's as hilarious to me as Yahtzee's claims of NSMBWii being uncreative, obviously not doing his job properly by commenting on level design. No, there is a place for 2D at retail and Nintendo's offerings can justify their price.
Nintendo isn't IMMUNE to criticism per say, but I just think it's funny how a bunch of criticisms from the "hardcore" are shallow, flimsy, and prove just how untrue their boasts of being "hardcore" are.
Because they still try to keep that wonderful, whimsical charm to gaming, and they tend to try new interesting and fun things with their games. Link as a wolf? Mario with a super soaker? First Person platforming? they aren't shy from being innovative, fuck that's what their known for. With Bioware churning out endless repaints to Baldurs gate (can't wait for Baldurs gate in the west.), Ubi soft giving me more Prince of Persia or Assassin of Persia and everyone else trying their hardest to imitate Gears of war/halo while their imitating Resident evil 4/goldeneye, how is Nintendo getting less negative reception?